Lesson of DS-9 Episode (Paradise)

[Darth Wong]

Why wouldn't the runabouts be counted if they are commissioned Starfleet vessels?

They are utility ships at best and must opperate from other larger ships. While they might have registry numbers, they are not starships, are never referred to as such, and it would not make sense to include them in fleet counts.

Yet again, you prove this assertion by simply stating that it is true. That's no proof, Alyeska.

[Darth Wong]

And exactly WHEN have we seen a Starship carrying runabouts? I never have. In 'Timeless' we see Picard and Co taking a runabout BACK to the Enterprise, but its never said to belong to her, its far more likely to belong to the *surprise* Starbase they just came from. Never have we seen a Runabout as part of a Starships invintory.

And Runabouts take missions into the Gamma Quadrent because:

A. DS9 didn't *have* the Defiant or any OTHER Starship to do them with during most of their exploration in the first two seasons.

B. Via the wormhole, the Gamma Quadrent is effectivly only a few kilomters away. And none of their missions required any more resources then a Runabout had. It performed them quite effectivly.

Shuttles, including the Tac Fighters, don't carry their own registration number which would denote them as their own Starship.

So you're saying that you agree the runabouts are considered starships?

PS. Could someone point me to the canon incident in which some character explained what criteria are used to determine whether a ship is considered a "starship"? I don't recall ever hearing one.

[Alyeska]

Why wouldn't the runabouts be counted if they are commissioned Starfleet vessels?

They are utility ships at best and must opperate from other larger ships. While they might have registry numbers, they are not starships, are never referred to as such, and it would not make sense to include them in fleet counts.

Yet again, you prove this assertion by simply stating that it is true. That's no proof, Alyeska.

Thats not proof? So what the fuck is proof? They don't use them as ships, they are never referred to in the same class as starships, and they have even been described as shuttle type vesels and utility ships.

You haven't given any good evidence that they are considered starships and counted as such in the fleets. Especialy when counting them in regards to combat fleets does not make sense.

[Alyeska]

And exactly WHEN have we seen a Starship carrying runabouts? I never have. In 'Timeless' we see Picard and Co taking a runabout BACK to the Enterprise, but its never said to belong to her, its far more likely to belong to the *surprise* Starbase they just came from. Never have we seen a Runabout as part of a Starships invintory.

And Runabouts take missions into the Gamma Quadrent because:

A. DS9 didn't *have* the Defiant or any OTHER Starship to do them with during most of their exploration in the first two seasons.

B. Via the wormhole, the Gamma Quadrent is effectivly only a few kilomters away. And none of their missions required any more resources then a Runabout had. It performed them quite effectivly.

Shuttles, including the Tac Fighters, don't carry their own registration number which would denote them as their own Starship.

So you're saying that you agree the runabouts are considered starships?

PS. Could someone point me to the canon incident in which some character explained what criteria are used to determine whether a ship is considered a "starship"? I don't recall ever hearing one.

No characters have given criteria, but the simplest explination is a ship that runs indepdent opperations. Runabouts have never done this.

[Darth Wong]

They are utility ships at best and must opperate from other larger ships. While they might have registry numbers, they are not starships, are never referred to as such, and it would not make sense to include them in fleet counts.

Yet again, you prove this assertion by simply stating that it is true. That's no proof, Alyeska.

Thats not proof? So what the fuck is proof?

What part of "proof" do you not understand? You state that "starship" is defined so that runabouts do not quality. When asked to prove this, you simply state that "starship" is defined that way so that runabouts do not qualify. Do you have even the vaguest fucking idea why circular logic is bad, asshat?

They don't use them as ships

I have yet to see you provide evidence that the word "starship" is defined in such a manner as to exclude vessels beneath a Miranda-class.

they are never referred to in the same class as starships, and they have even been described as shuttle type vesels and utility ships.

So? There are utility vessels in real navies; they are still considered "ships", are they not? And runabouts, unlike real utility vessels, can engage in battle.

You haven't given any good evidence that they are considered starships and counted as such in the fleets.

The fact that they can engage in battle, conduct independent incursions into enemy territory, and take up formation alongside larger vessels is proof enough. The word "starship" normally refers to any ship capable of interstellar travel; the burden of proof is on you to show that it has some more exclusive meaning in Star Trek.

Especialy when counting them in regards to combat fleets does not make sense.

And why doesn't it make sense? Oh yes, because they're not starships. And why aren't they starships? Oh yes, because you define "starship" that way. And why do you define "starship" that way? Oh yes, because you just DO

[Darth Wong]

No characters have given criteria,

In other words, you just made up a definition out of thin air in order to support your claims. Concession accepted.

but the simplest explination is a ship that runs indepdent opperations. Runabouts have never done this.

Bullshit, and bullshit. The simplest explanation of "starship" is a vessel capable of interstellar travel. And runabouts have run independent operations. The fact that a runabout has a base doesn't mean shit; every kind of ship has to periodically stop and refuel/resupply at a base. The point is that its operational range is sufficiently long that it can conduct independent operations in enemy territory, far from that base, which it can.

[Alyeska]

No characters have given criteria,

In other words, you just made up a definition out of thin air in order to support your claims. Concession accepted.

but the simplest explination is a ship that runs indepdent opperations. Runabouts have never done this.

Bullshit, and bullshit. The simplest explanation of "starship" is a vessel capable of interstellar travel. And runabouts have run independent operations. The fact that a runabout has a base doesn't mean shit; every kind of ship has to periodically stop and refuel/resupply at a base. The point is that its operational range is sufficiently long that it can conduct independent operations in enemy territory, far from that base, which it can.

And your explination means all shuttles are starships as well. Any warp capable ship is a starship by your definition. I seriously doubt Starfleet counts its shuttles when they count their fleets. I don't see why they would count their runabouts when they count their capitalships either.

[Darth Wong]

And your explination means all shuttles are starships as well. Any warp capable ship is a starship by your definition.

Well, give the man a prize, he's finally starting to figure it out! Did you know that modern USAF pilots sometimes refer to their fighters as "ships"? Your bizarre assertion that the word "ship" has a very narrow definition is composed of two primary components: bullshit and more bullshit.

I seriously doubt Starfleet counts its shuttles when they count their fleets.

Your personal doubt does not qualify as evidence.

I don't see why they would count their runabouts when they count their capitalships either.

Your personal incredulity also fails to qualify as evidence.

Come back to me when you have evidence. Until then, there is no reason to assume that a line of dialogue which includes the word "ship" must adhere to your strict made-up definition of that word. YOU are making the assertion; it is up to YOU to provide evidence in support of it.

[Alyeska]

And your explination means all shuttles are starships as well. Any warp capable ship is a starship by your definition.

Well, give the man a prize, he's finally starting to figure it out! Did you know that modern USAF pilots sometimes refer to their fighters as "ships"? Your bizarre assertion that the word "ship" has a very narrow definition is composed of two primary components: bullshit and more bullshit.

I seriously doubt Starfleet counts its shuttles when they count their fleets.

Your personal doubt does not qualify as evidence.

I don't see why they would count their runabouts when they count their capitalships either.

Your personal incredulity also fails to qualify as evidence.

Come back to me when you have evidence. Until then, there is no reason to assume that a line of dialogue which includes the word "ship" must adhere to your strict made-up definition of that word. YOU are making the assertion; it is up to YOU to provide evidence in support of it.

No Mike, you are asserting that when we have had fleet counts it includes every single warp capable ship. You prove this.

[Darth Wong]

No Mike, you are asserting that when we have had fleet counts it includes every single warp capable ship. You prove this.

http://www.m-w.com/

Your turn.

PS. You just admitted that they can be described as "ships" by using the word that way yourself. Next time, make a better effort not to contradict yourself.

[Alyeska]

No Mike, you are asserting that when we have had fleet counts it includes every single warp capable ship. You prove this.

http://www.m-w.com/

Your turn.

PS. You just admitted that they can be described as "ships" by using the word that way yourself. Next time, make a better effort not to contradict yourself.

(sigh)

Earlier in the thread someone states that Runabouts are included in fleet counts. Then we get to the point where you call all warp capable vessels to be full fledged starships.

Now I ask this. Do you believe that Runabouts are counted in fleet counts and do you believe that all warp capable shuttles are counted in fleet counts?

[Darth Wong]

(sigh)

Earlier in the thread someone states that Runabouts are included in fleet counts. Then we get to the point where you call all warp capable vessels to be full fledged starships.

Yes, that would be the outrageous statement where I argue that normal English word definitions should be assumed to apply to onscreen dialogue unless we have specific evidence to the contrary. How silly of me. What an unreasonable position to take in comparison to your position, whereby the word "ship" should be assumed to be defined in some special way other than its normal English word definition without a shred of onscreen substantiation for this alternate definition.

Now I ask this. Do you believe that Runabouts are counted in fleet counts and do you believe that all warp capable shuttles are counted in fleet counts?

I don't know. What I do know is that when fleet counts are used as "evidence", we can only go by what we do know, which is that these counts might include any ship that qualifies as a starship. YOU are the one making the assertion that they must NOT include these ships even though they fit the literal definition of the word, so the burden of proof is yours, not mine.

[Alyeska]

(sigh)

Earlier in the thread someone states that Runabouts are included in fleet counts. Then we get to the point where you call all warp capable vessels to be full fledged starships.

Yes, that would be the outrageous statement where I argue that normal English word definitions should be assumed to apply to onscreen dialogue unless we have specific evidence to the contrary. How silly of me. What an unreasonable position to take in comparison to your position, whereby the word "ship" should be assumed to be defined in some special way other than its normal English word definition without a shred of onscreen substantiation for this alternate definition.

Now I ask this. Do you believe that Runabouts are counted in fleet counts and do you believe that all warp capable shuttles are counted in fleet counts?

I don't know. What I do know is that when fleet counts are used as "evidence", we can only go by what we do know, which is that these counts might include any ship that qualifies as a starship. YOU are the one making the assertion that they must NOT include these ships even though they fit the literal definition of the word, so the burden of proof is yours, not mine.

Ok, I can tell you what is going on. We weren't arguing the same subject. I was arguing that Runabouts and similar sized ships aren't used in fleet counts and you were arguing the definition of ship. These two debates while connected, aren't necessarily relavent to eachother. A fleet contains specific ships and could very well exclude Runabouts or include Fighters. On the other hand a ship, or rather a starship is merely something that can travel between systems.

I can't deny the points you have made. And I agree that fleets might or might not count say Runabouts, it depends on the circumstances.

However, I would argue that ships without registries are likely not counted when fleet counts are given. These are secondary ships counted as part of the compliment of larger ships.

[Darth Wong]

I can't deny the points you have made. And I agree that fleets might or might not count say Runabouts, it depends on the circumstances.

Fair enough; we agree it's ambiguous then.

However, I would argue that ships without registries are likely not counted when fleet counts are given. These are secondary ships counted as part of the compliment of larger ships.

I would argue that there is still some ambiguity here as well, but I would agree that the lack of a registry number certainly suggests a minor status. However, runabouts do have names and registry numbers, as listed by Patrick Degan earlier.

[Chris OFarrell]

So you're saying that you agree the runabouts are considered starships?

Indeterminate. They have NCC numbers so they are probably counted as commisioned Starships in the Federation OOB. But I would hesitate to call them STARSHIPS, Runabout is a good enough description. They are an enhanced heavy duty shuttle. But not a Starship. The smallest Starship, the Defiant is what, 120 Meters long? Bit of a step to call it one, but in terms of any fleet size with the reg numbers game, they are very much players.

Fighters however don't carry any registry number, excepting their motherships, so they can't be considered to be part of a ship count, any more then the shuttles in hangers can.

[Patrick Degan]

So you're saying that you agree the runabouts are considered starships?

Indeterminate. They have NCC numbers so they are probably counted as commisioned Starships in the Federation OOB. But I would hesitate to call them STARSHIPS, Runabout is a good enough description. They are an enhanced heavy duty shuttle. But not a Starship. The smallest Starship, the Defiant is what, 120 Meters long? Bit of a step to call it one, but in terms of any fleet size with the reg numbers game, they are very much players.

Fighters however don't carry any registry number, excepting their motherships, so they can't be considered to be part of a ship count, any more then the shuttles in hangers can.

The difference I would think comes in the form of endurance: fighters and shuttlecraft (even warp-capable types) are short-range craft of limited endurance without return to the nearest base or vessel, and also of limited capability. Runabouts appear to have far greater warp capability and range and can sustain a larger number of passengers on board. They can be employed for distant scouting and can mount heavier weapons than any fighter or shittlecraft is capable of.

[Alyeska]

So you're saying that you agree the runabouts are considered starships?

Indeterminate. They have NCC numbers so they are probably counted as commisioned Starships in the Federation OOB. But I would hesitate to call them STARSHIPS, Runabout is a good enough description. They are an enhanced heavy duty shuttle. But not a Starship. The smallest Starship, the Defiant is what, 120 Meters long? Bit of a step to call it one, but in terms of any fleet size with the reg numbers game, they are very much players.

Fighters however don't carry any registry number, excepting their motherships, so they can't be considered to be part of a ship count, any more then the shuttles in hangers can.

The difference I would think comes in the form of endurance: fighters and shuttlecraft (even warp-capable types) are short-range craft of limited endurance without return to the nearest base or vessel, and also of limited capability. Runabouts appear to have far greater warp capability and range and can sustain a larger number of passengers on board. They can be employed for distant scouting and can mount heavier weapons than any fighter or shittlecraft is capable of.

Your not entirely correct. The Peregrine Tactical Fighters mount superior weapons over the Runabout.

[InnocentBystander]

That dapening field obviuos affected his mind, they should load those things into torpedos, get one to latch onto an enemy ship close to its reactor, and off it goes!

[Col. Crackpot]

The difference I would think comes in the form of endurance: fighters and shuttlecraft (even warp-capable types) are short-range craft of limited endurance without return to the nearest base or vessel, and also of limited capability. Runabouts appear to have far greater warp capability and range and can sustain a larger number of passengers on board. They can be employed for distant scouting and can mount heavier weapons than any fighter or shittlecraft is capable of.

thus making runabouts roughly analgous to PT boats used in the second world war. They have: a serial number, the ability to sustain a crew for a few days, weapons etc. Whereas 'shuttlecraft' would be more akin to longboats and skiffs.